You are on page 1of 18

RESEARCH PROJECT ON

Evidentiary Value of
Post-mortem Forensic
Toxicology
Conceived and Prepared
By
SRINIVAS. AC
BA0130060
Submitted to
Prof. Miss. Deepa Manickam,
Faculty of Evidence law,
TNNLS, Trichy
Semester VI

DECLARATION

I Srinivas.AC, hereby declare that this project work entitled Evidentiary Value of
Postmortem Forensic Toxicology has been originally carried out by me under the guidance and
supervision of Miss. Deepa Manickam, Associate Professor of Law, Tamil Nadu National Law
School, Tiruchirappalli - 620 009. This work has not been submitted either in whole or in part of
any Degree / Diploma in this Institution or any other Institution/University.

Place : Tiruchirappalli
Date : 19-03-2016

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Thanks to the Almighty who gave me the strength to accomplish the project with sheer
hard work and honesty. This research venture has been made possible due to the generous cooperation of various persons. To list them all is not practicable, even to repay them in words is
beyond the domain of my lexicon.

May I observe the protocol to show my deep gratitude to the venerated Faculty-in-charge
Miss. Deepa Manickam, for his kind gesture in allotting me such a wonderful and elucidating
research topic. Apart from that I would like to thank my friends for their support and suggestions
during the process of making this project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
THE INDIAN SCENARIO
PRINCIPLE
AN EXPERT
EXPERT OPINION
MEDICAL EVIDENCE VS OCULAR
EVIDENCE
DRUGS AND NARCOTICS
POST-MORTEM REPORT
EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF FORENSIC
SCIENCE
FORENSIC TOXICOLOGY
JIA KHAN CASE
SUNANDHA PUSHKARs CASE
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABSTRACT

EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF POST-MORTEM FORENSIC TOXICOLOGY


Evidence is the heart of all cases which is vital in moving up with the allegations.
It has various classifications and it differs case to case. Human body consists of
complex structures that stimulates the study of forensic sciences in providing an
evidentiary value to all criminal cases especially injuries leading to death. Medical
Jurisprudence or forensic medicine is said to be not an exact science and it is not
possible to state with mathematical precision, for instance, the exact time of the
death or when certain injuries have been inflicted. However, experts in forensic
medicine play a very important role in criminal proceedings and their evidence is
often relied upon by the courts in arriving at a certain conclusion. Section 45 and
46 questions as to the cause and time of the death, whether a particular drug is
capable of causing the death, etc. And that will be affirmed through these forensic
evidences which helps in achieving justice. This paper aims to describe and discuss
the evidentiary value of postmortem forensic toxicology.
KEY WORDS:
Medical Jurisprudence, Forensic Sciences, Toxicology, Postmortem Report, Expert
opinion.

INTRODUCTION
In the middle of 19th century natural science began to develop by leaps and bounds. The mystic
theories theretofore advanced to explain the scheme of things began to lose ground as the clear,
cold logic of scientific experiment gradually shed a new light on the mysteries of universe. The
change in point of view from the mystic to the scientific soon became apparent not only in
criminal investigation but in the different facets of the legal system. Now there emerged two
facets of a single case. The facet stated and the facet proved from scientific view point. The era
of forensic science had arrived.
According to one definition, the word forensic means the application of scientific knowledge
to legal problems. The term forensic science refers to a group of scientific disciplines which
are concerned with the application of their particular scientific area of expertise to law
enforcement, criminal, civil, legal, and judicial Matters1. Forensic Science is application of
science or scientific techniques to the law and to solve crime. Forensic Experts, Forensic
Scientists, Crime Investigators and Examiners applies forensic science techniques to solve crime,
examine & authenticate: evidences, suspected documents, fingerprints, digital files etc.
The results of forensic related investigations are often detailed in a forensic report. These reports
are often used for several purposes, including billing, affidavits, and as proof of what was found
or not found. These reports are very important to a case. The expert opinions and reports to
various courts in India and abroad under section 45 of Indian Evidence Act, which were highly
appreciated, accepted and acknowledged for accuracy and expertise.
Forensics include- the examination of scenes of crime, recovery of evidence, examination of
evidence, interpretation of findings and presentation of the conclusions or results reached for use
in court / justice2. During an investigation, forensic evidence is collected at a crime scene,
analyzed in a laboratory and often presented in court. Each crime scene is unique, and each case
1 Forensic Science in Criminal Investigation & Trials, B. R. Sharma, Fourth Edition, Universal
Law Publications
2 Forensic Science in Criminal Investigation, Dr. Jai Shanker Singh, Unique Law Publications.

presents its own challenges. Complex cases may require the collection, examination and analysis
of a large amount of evidence.
These cases may involve multiple forensic experts with backgrounds in biology, chemistry,
physics, computer science and other disciplines. These forensic scientists work separately to
analyze the evidence in a particular case3.
Forensic science is the use of science in the service of the law. Sciences used in forensics include
any discipline that can aid in the collection, preservation and analysis of evidence such as

Chemistry (for the identification of explosives),

Engineering (for examination of structural design)

Biology (for DNA identification or matching).

A forensic scientist is expert in any technical field and can provide an analysis of the evidence,
witness testimony on examination results, technical support and even training in his or her
specialized area.
Analysis of forensic evidence is used in the investigation and prosecution of civil and criminal
proceedings. Often, it can help to establish the guilt or innocence of possible suspects. Forensic
evidence is also used to link crimes that are thought to be related to one another.

The Indian Scenario


Let us first cultivate the legal aspect of forensic and medical evidence in the India. As per
Section 45 of Indian evidence Act 1872- When the Court has to form and opinion upon a point of
foreign law or of science or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the
opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in
3 http://www.forensic-medecine.info/forensic-pathology.html

questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts. Such persons are
called experts.
Further as per Section 46 of Indian evidence Act 1872- it is stated that facts, not otherwise
relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of experts, when such
opinions are relevant.
Thus the ingredients of section 45 and section 46 are highlights that:
1) The court when necessary will place its faith on skills of persons who have technical
knowledge of the facts concerned.
2) The court will rely the bona fide statement of proof given by the expert concluded on the basis
of scientific techniques.
3) The evidence considered irrelevant would be given relevance in eyes of law if they are
consistent with the opinion of experts.
Thus we see that expert evidence helps the courts to draw logical conclusions from the facts
presented by experts, which are based on their opinions derived by their specialized skills
acquired by study and experience. Hence, experts are routinely involved in the administration of
justice particularly in criminal courts.
Highlighting the situation in the most commonly sought after experts:
The Medical Experts:
In India, we have adversarial system of justice administration and ordinarily medical evidence is
admitted only when the expert gives an oral evidence under oath in the courts of law expect
under special circumstances like:
a) When evidence has already been admitted in a lower court;
b) Expert opinions expressed in a treatise;
c) Evidence given in a previous judicial proceeding;
d) Expert cannot be called as witness;
e) Hospital records like admission/discharge register, birth/death certificates etc.

In, India, it is a common perception that lot of time and effort is required to record evidence and
therefore by enlarge members of the medical profession does not like to involve in medico legal
cases. Some of the possible reasons put forward for this perception are:
a) Undue time consumption;
b) Repeated adjournments;
c) Lack of work culture in the courts
Hardly, any scientific data is available to support or refute this perception in relation to medical
evidence. Therefore, it was planned to undertake a pilot study to analyze the quantum of time
and effort put in by medical experts to get the evidence recorded in criminal courts and other
issues related to it4.
Principle:
According to the Section 45 the opinions of persons who have special skill in foreign laws,
science or art, and on handwriting and finger impressions are relevant. Under certain
circumstances the evidence of opinions of persons who are called experts, have become
relevant. An opinion evidence of an expert after its acceptance by the court becomes the
decision of the court and causes to be a opinion evidence of the expert. The question is whether
A died of poisoning. The opinion of doctor who performed post-mortem is relevant.
An expert:
An expert is one who has made the subject upon which he speaks a matter of study, practice or
observation and he must have a special knowledge of the subject. It simply means an expert is a
person who has special knowledge and skill in any particular subject to which inquiry relates.
One who has studies a subject carefully falls within the definition, though he has never
practiced it. The witness must have made a special study of the subject or required special
experience therein. Thus, an expert is one who has acquired special knowledge, skill or
experience in any science, art, trade or profession, and such knowledge have been acquired by
practice, observation or careful studies. Even a witness who has no academic qualification but
has professional skill and experience is treated to be an expert. A expert witness is one who
4 Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, Moitra & Kaushal, Third Edition, Delight
Publications

has devoted time and study to a special branch of learning, and thus is specially skilled on those
points on which he is asked to state his opinion. The opinion of such experts is admissible in
evidence as relevant facts by virtue of Section 45 of the Evidence Act. Where the signature on
Xerox copies of acknowledgements was disputed it was held that comparison by handwriting
expert is not necessary.
Expert opinion:
Section 45 clearly deals with the opinion of persons who are called experts. There are matters
mentioned in the section in which help is required from witnesses having experiences and skill
and the opinion given by such witness is expert opinion. The evidence of a doctor conducting
post mortem without producing any authority in support of his opinion is insufficient to grant
conviction to an accused. But, the opinion of the doctor who actually examined the injured and
conducted the post mortem examination must be preferred to the expert opinion of the doctor
who gave his opinion on the basis of the injury report, X-ray report, and post mortem report. It
was also held that credible ocular testimony was preferable to medical opinion.
The three illustrations appended to this section show the relevancy of the opinion of experts. The
report of an official of the Anti-Corruption Bureau as to the course of investigation has been held
to be not that of an expert. Where the age of the rape victim was fixed by the doctor only by
chemical examination and ossification test or other pathological tests were not performed it was
held that the assessment of age so made was on fragile premises. The medical report determining
the age of a person held, is never conclusive in nature5.
Although Section 45 makes the opinion of experts relevant the court is not always bound to
accept the expert opinion, because the evidence of an expert is a weak type of evidence and
courts to consider it unsafe to relay on it without independent and reliable corroboration. Expert
evidence can be used to corroborate other evidence. The expert opinion is only advisory and the
court has to form its own opinion. Expert opinions, even when proved in accordance with law,
at the best constitute material for the court, to arrive at a proper conclusion, the ultimate
discretion to pronounce upon concerned issues rests with the court.
5 Expert Witness Code of Conduct. Part 28, Rule 9C and Part 28A, Rule 2 NSW. Attorney
Generals Department lawlink. Available from: http://www.agd.nsw.gov.au/dc.nsf/pages/
witcode#top/.

Expert Opinion v Opinions of Ordinary Witness:


It is also well settled that opinion of an expert cannot be more reliable than that the statement of
a witness of fact. A court also may compare the disputed writing with admitted writing under
section 73 of the Act. But it must be borne in mind that the conclusions based on mere
comparison of handwriting, must, at best be indecisive and yield to the positive evidence in the
case. When there is conflict of opinion between the experts, then the court is competent to form
its own opinion with regard to signatures on a document. Where there is medical evidence and
ocular testimony normally ocular testimony should be preferred unless it belies fundamental
facts.
In certain classes of cases the opinions of ordinary witnesses are not only of helpful but in case
of necessity these are admitted. It is unsafe to base a conviction wholly an expert opinion without
substantial corroboration. The court accepted the evidence of a wife as to the paternity of a ten
mouths old child, in spite of unanimous opinion of several doctors.
Subject matters of inquiry:
Drugs and Narcotics:
Contraband was seized under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The
analyst in his chief examination stated that the contraband was charas. It was held that the
probative value of his evidence could not be destroyed merely because in cross-examination he
could not answer whether the contraband contained cow dung also6.
Post mortem report:
A post mortem report is no evidence. Sufficient weightage should be given to the evidence of the
doctor who has conducted the post mortem, as compared to the statements found in the textbooks, but giving weightage does not ipso facto mean that each and every statement made by a
medical witness should be accepted on its face-value even when it is self-contradictory7.
Medical evidence v. Ocular evidence:
6 Law Relating to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in India, R. P. Kataria, Second
Edition, Orient Publications
7 http://www.forensic-medecine.info/forensic-pathology.html

Death was caused by gun shoot injury. Ocular evidence was that the firing took place from a long
range, where medical evidence had shown from close range. According to court the tattooing or
charring of wound depend upon the constituents of propellant charge and the nature of gun have
role to play8. Hence, plea as to conflict in ocular and medical evidence regarding distance of
firing is not tenable.
Evidentiary value:
As the expert opinion is a weak type of evidence it is usually considered to be of light value. The
evidence of expert is not conclusive. The opinion of the expert is not binding upon a judge and
that is why the court can refuse to rely on the evidence of an expert if it is not supported by
circumstantial evidences.
The Supreme Court once observed that there is natural tendency on the part of expert witness to
support the view of the party who called him could not be downgraded. Many so-called expert
have been shown to be remunerated witnesses making themselves available to hire to pledge
their oath in favor of party paying them.
No opinion of an expert is admissible unless he has been examined as witness. The adverse party
has a right and opportunity of cross-examining the expert. Before expert testimony can be
admitted, two things must be proved, viz.:
(i) The subject is such that expert testimony is necessary;
(ii) That the witness in question is really an expert.
It is the duty of the judge to decide whether the skill of any person in the matter on which
evidence of his opinion is offered, is sufficient to entitle him to be considered as an expert.
Credibility and competence of an expert are material question. The evidence of an expert is only
an opinion. It is not the province of the expert to act as a judge or jury. Without examining the
expert as a witness in the court no reliance can be placed on his opinion9.

8 Cri L J 2002 118-121


9 Pt. Parmanand Katara v. Union of India. AIR. SC, 1989; 2039-2045

Before venturing in the fascinating and intriguing world of Medical Science and let us try to seek
the link between evidence and forensic science.
Forensic Toxicology
Forensic toxicology is the use of toxicology and other disciplines such as analytical chemistry,
pharmacology and clinical chemistry to aid medical or legal investigation of death, poisoning,
and drug use. The primary concern for forensic toxicology is not the legal outcome of the
toxicological investigation, but rather the technology and techniques for obtaining and
interpreting the results. A toxicological analysis can be done to various kinds of samples. The
first comprehensive work on forensic toxicology was published in 1813 by Mathieu Orifila. He
was a respected Spanish chemist and the physician who is often given the distinction of "father
of toxicology." His work emphasized the need for adequate proof of identification and the need
for quality assurance. It also recognized the application of forensic toxicology in pharmaceutical,
clinical, industrial and environmental fields. Some of the samples used in Forensic Pathology are
Urine, Blood, Hair sample, Oral fluid and other bodily fluid10.
Why and when is forensic toxicology used?
In post-mortem investigations, suspected drugs overdoses are clear situations where toxicology is
required to establish if an excessive intake of the drug occurred and, if so, whether this
contributed to death. Conversely, toxicology can eliminate the possibility of a drug overdose if
concentrations are not capable of causing death, given all other factors. This means that
toxicology testing can produce a positive result even in cases where drug use is not mentioned in
the police circumstances. This is not surprising given the wide availability of potentially toxic
substances, both legal and illegal. In addition, concentrations of substance change after death
making any interpretation difficult, no matter the concentration.
In Many cases, poisons may be detected by the toxicology laboratory but are not necessarily a
cause of death, rather their presence may be relevant in the circumstances of death. For example,
alcohol and impairing drugs are found in about half of all drivers killed in motor vehicle crashes
in Australia, nearly one--third (31%) of all traffic--related deaths in the United States and in a
significant proportion of other accidental deaths. Alcohol and/or drugs are also found in a
10KSN Reddy. The Essentials of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology.23rd ed.(2004).

significant number of other deaths reported to the coroner; for example, in suicides that include
non--drug related intentional deaths11. In Death cases where natural disease is partially to blame,
drugs that indicate an underlying disease are often detected, such as drugs that have been used to
treat a condition or pain. Sometimes these drugs are regarded as contributing to the cause of
death. Regardless how the individual died, toxicology testing can determine whether levels of
toxic substances may have contributed to this death.
Who can serve as an expert forensic science witness at court?
Over the years, evidence presented at trial has grown increasingly difficult for the average juror
to understand. By calling on an expert witness who can discuss complex evidence or testing in an
easy--to--understand manner, trial lawyers can better present their cases and jurors can be
better equipped to weigh the evidence.
But this brings up additional difficult questions. How does the court define whether a person is
an expert? What qualifications must they meet to provide their opinion in a court of law? These
questions, too, are addressed in Fed. R. Evid. 702.
It only allows experts qualified By knowledge, skill, experience, training or education. To be
considered a true expert in any field generally requires a significant level of training and
experience. The various forensic disciplines follow different training plans, but most include
in--house training, assessments and practical exams, and continuing education. Oral
Presentation practice, including moot court experience (simulated Courtroom proceeding), is
very helpful in preparing examiners for questioning in a trial.
Normally, the individual that issued the laboratory report would serve as the expert at court. By
issuing a report, that individual takes responsibility for the analysis. This person could be a
supervisor or technical leader, but doesnt necessarily need to be the one who did the analysis.
The opposition may also call in experts to refute this testimony, and both witnesses are subject to
the standard in use by that court12.

11 VV Pillay, Textbook of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology. 14th ed. Hyderabad: Paras Publishing .

12 Frye, Daubert, Fed. R. Evid. 702

Regarding their expertise. Each court can accept any person as an expert, and there have been
instances where individuals who lack proper training and background have been declared
experts. When necessary, the opponent can question potential witnesses in an attempt to show
that they do not have applicable expertise and are not qualified to testify on the topic. The
admissibility decision is left to the judge.

Jia khan case


Mumbai Mirror reported that the results raised a strong suspicion that her death might be a
murder. Jiah's mother, Rabia always maintained that her daughter hadn't committed suicide. She
has now asked for her body be exhumed and re-examined. Dr RK Sharma, former head of
Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, AIIMS, said that there might be a "strong
possibility" of Jiah death being "a homicidal hanging." He blames CFSL for not investigating
properly and destroying the sample which should have been sent for DNA testing.
Referring to the 300 ml of alcohol that was found in Jiah's stomach, Dr Sharma's report said that
"if that amount of alcohol was found in her body, then she was clearly incapacitated and it is
possible for an able-bodied person to hang an incapacitated person."

Sunandha Pushkars case


The controversy over the death of Sunanda Pushkar, wife of Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, took a
new turn with the leak of her latest post mortem report submitted to AIIMS, that stated the cause
of death as "poisoning". The Delhi police have been asked to 're-examine' the case, following the
latest revelation. The finding could now pave the way for the Delhi Police to register a First
Information Report (FIR) against unknown persons and take up the investigation again. However
Delhi Police spokesperson Rajan Bhagat told IANS that "under section 174 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, the inquest proceeding in the Sundanda Pushkar case is still pending and we
didn't add anything to it." The came around ten days after the post mortem report of the Central
Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) was submitted to the Delhi Police by the All India Institute
of Medical Sciences (AIIMS).

It states that the traces of the drug alprax, which was found in her body, was not enough of a
lethal dose to kill her. "It also states that Sunanda was not suffering from Lupus (a chronic
inflammatory disease that occurs when the body's immune system attacks tissues and organs) as
claimed by her husband Shashi Tharoor", the New Indian Express reported, adding that "The
report demolished several previous findings that claimed Sunanda was not suffering from any
ailments and that she was healthy and had no disease of heart, kidney, liver or lung."
The leaked report said that the AIIMS medical board "had thoroughly pursued the various
documents that were submitted to them by the investigating officers along with the post mortem
report and histopathology report of viscera after which it was concluded the cause of Pushkar's
death was poisoning". Viscera are positive for ethyl alcohol, caffeine, acetaminophen and
cotinine.
The document also revealed that the medical report reserved comment on the specific poison or
chemical responsible since there were a lot of limitations on the viscera report. However a
Hindustan Times report notes that "senior officers privy to the "informal communication said
both reports were 'inconclusive', 'muddled' and 'based on conjecture' and that they were yet to
take a call on their course of action. The AIIMS report just reiterated the results forwarded to us
by FSL. All it said was that Pushkar could not have died of an Alprax overdose. At the same
time, both communications failed to specify the nature of poison that they claimed led to her
death. "The duration of injuries have been opined already. However, the reason of these physical
injuries, circumstantial evidences and statements have not been submitted by the investigative
officer," the report states. Pushkar, 52, was found dead in her room at a five-star hotel in south
Delhi on 17 January.

Conclusion
There is a unanimity that medical and forensic evidence plays a crucial role in helping the courts
of law to arrive at logical conclusions. Therefore, the expert medical professionals should be
encouraged to undertake medico legal work and simultaneously the atmosphere in courts should
be congenial to the medical witness. This attains utmost importance looking at the outcome of

the case, since if good experts avoid court attendance, less objective professional will fill the gap,
ultimately affecting the justice. The need to involve more and more professionals in expert
testimony has been felt by different organizations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. KSN Reddy. The Essentials of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology.23rd ed.(2004).
2. VV Pillay, Textbook of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology. 14th ed. Hyderabad: Paras
Publishing.
3. Law Relating to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in India, R. P. Kataria,
Second Edition, Orient Publications
4. Forensic Science in Criminal Investigation & Trials, B. R. Sharma, Fourth Edition,
Universal Law Publications
5. Forensic Science in Criminal Investigation, Dr. Jai Shanker Singh, Unique Law
Publications.
6. http://www.forensic-medecine.info/forensic-pathology.html
7. http://www.indianexpress/crimescene/indiancourtreport/sunandhapushkar-032131/

You might also like